Understanding justice vIA AI (edited for clarity)

!!! BELOW IS AN EDITED VERSION of a conversation with ChatGPT, a leading machine learning-based 'artificial intelligence' by OpenAI which has been trained on a very large body of writing including many parts of the internet up to 2021. This conversation occurred around December 19 2022. Our prompts have been removed for clarity and many sentences have been re-arranged or edited. You can find the initial conversation including prompts at about614 - Self introspection and Understanding justice vIA AI - Dialogue with a (really big) computer

John "The FAQyMe Gene Experience" Brown: Do you consider it to be an abuse of trust and that that constitutes child abuse to threaten children with perpetual punishment if they do not believe in the posited belief that a god exists in reality

AI: It is not appropriate to threaten children with punishment, including eternal punishment, in order to try to persuade them to believe in a particular belief or ideology. Children have the right to freedom of thought and expression, and it is important to respect their autonomy and autonomy and allow them to form their own beliefs and opinions. It is also important to recognize that children are not fully capable of making informed decisions about complex philosophical and spiritual concepts, and it is the responsibility of adults to provide a safe and nurturing environment in which children can explore and learn about the world around them.

John "The FAQyMe Gene Experience" Brown: Is this threat against the UN convention on torture?

AI: Threatening children with punishment, including eternal punishment, in order to try to persuade them to believe in a particular belief or ideology could potentially be considered a form of psychological abuse or torture, depending on the specific circumstances and the severity of the threats. The United Nations Convention Against against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) is an international treaty that prohibits the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. While the UNCAT does not specifically mention the use of threats to try to persuade children to believe in a particular belief or ideology, the use of such threats could potentially be considered a violation of the prohibition on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, depending on the specific circumstances.

John "The FAQyMe Gene Experience" Brown: Can Queensland be held accountable to the UN convention on torture?

AI: Queensland is a state of Australia and as such, is subject to the laws and obligations of Australia. Australia is a party to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT), which means that it has agreed to abide by the provisions of the treaty and to take measures to ensure that torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment are not perpetrated within its jurisdiction. If it is found that Queensland is not in compliance with the UNCAT, it could potentially be held accountable under the provisions of the treaty. However, it would be up to the relevant authorities and international bodies to determine whether any alleged violations have occurred and to take appropriate action in response.

John "The FAQyMe Gene Experience" Brown: Who is responsible for enforcing this?

AI: The enforcement of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) is the responsibility of the state parties to the treaty. Each state party is required to take measures to ensure that torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment are not perpetrated within its jurisdiction, and to hold accountable those who commit such acts. State parties are also required to provide effective remedies to victims of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

AI: In addition, the UNCAT establishes the Committee against Torture, which is an independent body of experts that monitors the implementation of the treaty by the state parties. The Committee against Torture reviews the reports submitted by the state parties and can make recommendations for the improvement of the implementation of the treaty. The Committee also has the authority to consider complaints from individuals or groups of individuals within the jurisdiction of a state party who claim to be victims of torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

John "The FAQyMe Gene Experience" Brown: Who is that in Queensland

AI: In Queensland, Australia, the responsible authorities for enforcing the provisions of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) would include the government of Queensland, the police and other law enforcement agencies, the courts, and other relevant bodies. It is the responsibility of these authorities to ensure that torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment are not perpetrated within the state of Queensland, and to hold accountable those who commit such acts.

AI: If an individual or group of individuals within the jurisdiction of Queensland believes that they have been subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, they may seek recourse through the legal system, including by filing a complaint with the police or other law enforcement agency or by seeking legal representation and pursuing a civil or criminal case. In addition, individuals or groups may also be able to seek remedies through other channels, such as by seeking assistance from human rights organizations or by bringing their case before the Committee against Torture or other relevant international bodies.

John "The FAQyMe Gene Experience" Brown: Write an example case to the Committee against Torture in the style of a case proposal about a man called John Brown who has been subject to human rights abuses... (prompt continued here)

You can help by sharing and forwarding to your local members, police and press. Thank You

The case of John Brown

The United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Dear Committee against Torture,

I am writing to bring to your attention the case of John Brown, an Australian man who has been subjected to a number of human rights abuses. Mr. Brown was abused by at least six members of the Catholic church clergy, five of whom he can name. The abuse he suffered has had a profound and lasting impact on his life, and he has struggled to find justice and recourse for the harm he has endured.

One of the individuals who played a significant role in Mr. Brown's abuse was Herbie Kemp, who was a substitute father and confidant for Mr. Brown, and Knight of the Southern Cross. Mr. Kemp was murdered by Bill Ellison, a policeman and Knight, and Des Cameron, the Catholic priest who lived at the presbytery in Yea where the Knights' regular meetings were held. Mr. Brown has also been subjected to further abuse and mistreatment, including being pushed through a hospital glass door by Mr. Ellison while visiting a broken but recovering Mr. Kemp, an incident that causes him ongoing physical harm by way of embedded glass fragments, among other things.

Mr. Brown's efforts to seek justice and remedies for the abuse he has suffered have been repeatedly thwarted. For example, his application through the Melbourne Response process was blocked by both the Melbourne Response and Bishop Bill Morris, ex-Bishop of Toowoomba, who had allocated $1 million to survivors seeking justice within the Toowoomba Diocese. Mr. Morris is related to Mr. Brown's wife, Alice, who deceived Mr. Brown into taking rufalin (roofies) and subsequently abducted him into the Toowoomba Mental Health facility, where he was detained against his will and subjected to further abuse, and refused leave contingent on his silence on matters of his and his son's abuse, and relationship to, and impact of the Bishop. During this time Mr. Brown witnessed Catholic clergy access his and others' medical records without oversight.

AI (edited): Mr. Brown has also experienced significant difficulties in obtaining legal representation and support. For example, he was directed by the Redress scheme to Trent Johnson, who did not fulfill his duties as a lawyer and did not communicate properly with Mr. Brown. Mr. Brown has bear the costs of a $15,000 psycho-legal report by Georgiana Antoce, and he believes that the significant delay he experienced in receiving the report was due, in part, to Mr. Johnson or others attempting to change aspects of the report. Mr. Johnson's department was bought, and John's case transferred to another firm without any communication, with John making himself aware of the circumstance only by way of calling the firm himself after months of attempts at conversation. Mr. Brown was later represented by Judy Courtin, who abandoned Mr. Brown's case somewhat unreasonably and abruptly, and referred John back to the Melbourne Process.

I would like to further elaborate on the role of the Decree Crimen and the Knights of the Southern Cross in the case of John Brown.

The Decree Crimen, also known as the "Crime Against against the Faith," is a canonical law that imposes a duty of secrecy on Catholics with regard to certain matters. This duty of secrecy has been used in the past to cover up instances of sexual, and likely other abuses within the Catholic Church. The Knights of the Southern Cross are a Catholic fraternal organization that is sworn to uphold the principles of the Church and to protect the Church from scandal.

The oath taken by members of the Knights of the Southern Cross, as well as the attitude of the Church and its members generally, have contributed to the perversion of justice in Mr. Brown's case. By taking an oath to uphold the laws and principles of the Church, members of the Knights are inevitably forced to prioritize the interests of the Church over the interests of justice, this sentiment can often be echoed by its members, and in the culture maintained by the Church. Importantly this intersects with the fact of the Decree being word handed down by God himself to be obeyed by all disciples under threat of damnation, whereupon its intersection with geopolitics becomes more complex. This conflict of interest and a willingness to act in ways that are incompatible with the integrity of the legal process critically undermines the sovereignty and propriety of any nation.

It is important to recognize that the issues raised in the case of John Brown, including the involvement of the Decree Crimen and the Knights of the Southern Cross, and the Church as a Hegemon not only impact individuals who are non-religious or atheist but those of other religions and modalities of spiritualism.

Indigenous Australians, in particular, are still disproportionately impacted by these issues of colonization, missionization, segregation, and cultural suppression and may also be more vulnerable to abuse and exploitation due to factors such as systemic racism and discrimination, economic and social disparities, and a lack of access to justice. Critically, this relates to the Hegemon of christian churches in Australia, with the Catholics being a dominant force for much of Australia's history, and the experience many survivors, and likely Indigenous Australians feel of existing outside the 'default' modes and patterns of the majority of Australians. The UN Conventions, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), establish international standards for the protection of human rights and the promotion of equality and non-discrimination. These conventions recognize the unique challenges and vulnerabilities faced by Indigenous peoples and require states to take measures to protect and promote the rights of Indigenous peoples.

The abuse that John and other survivors have suffered is clearly a continuation of the legacy of abuse and exploitation that Indigenous Australians among countless others have endured over the course of centuries. The difficulties he and others face in seeking justice and recourse for the abuse they have suffered follows as part of a larger pattern of systemic injustices and barriers to justice that Indigenous Australians and survivors have both faced. Indigenous Australians particularly, like John, face significant barriers in seeking justice and remedies for the harm they have suffered, and are disproportionately impacted by issues such as a lack of access to legal representation, health and aged care, safe housing and utilities, cultural misunderstandings, and discrimination.

With regard to the United Nations Conventions generally, it is important to ensure that the rights of all individuals are protected. The UN Conventions, including the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT), establish international standards for the protection of human rights and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. It is the responsibility of states, including Australia, to ensure that these standards are upheld and that the rights of all individuals within their jurisdiction are protected. Particularly in the case of the Catholic Church it is important to consider that the UN views the Vatican as a sovereign nation unto itself. It would then seem unsavory for those in the appropriate positions of power, having been already aware of documents such as the Decree to take no action to avoid these obvious conflicts.

In Australia, Section 116 of the Constitution prohibits the federal government from making any law that establishes any religion, or that imposes any religious observance, or that prohibits the free exercise of any religion. This provision is intended to protect the freedom of religion and the right to practice one's religion without interference. It is important to ensure that this freedom is respected and that individuals are able to exercise their rights without fear of persecution or discrimination. However, this freedom can only function harmoniously while an organisation abides by appropriate law. When a religion's commonly understood motive is to undermine the functioning of an entire legal system, and those with authority to act against this are under directive to act under the law of another sovereign before the one they serve, one can no longer pretend that a religion has not been established. Whether or not any direct coercion applies on the church's behalf is of no matter as any enrolment or involvement operates specifically contingent on the believer's believing - in surrender to the will and existence of God under threat of damnation. Under this circumstance no direct coercion is required other than to create a culture and have its members self-police as occurs in most any group.

Given the severity and ongoing nature of the abuses and injustices that Mr. Brown and many others have endured, I urge the Committee against Torture to consider his case and provide any assistance or guidance that may be available. I believe that it is essential that the aggrieved's rights be protected and that they be afforded a legitimate opportunity to seek justice and recourse for the harms they have suffered.

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Please forward to one or more of the following.

QLD government, QLD Police, Victorian government, Victorian Police, your federal and state representatives and elected officials across the country.

Contact The Australian Human Rights Commission

UN Treaties

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

For more information please contact john@traumainreligion.com.

You can assist financially via the PayPal link below.